Localization of Activation Origin on Patient-Specific Epicardial Surface by Empirical Bayesian Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Ablation treatment of ventricular arrhythmias can be facilitated by pre-procedure planning aided by electrocardiographic inverse solution, which can help to localize the origin of arrhythmia. Our aim was to improve localization accuracy of the inverse solution by using a novel Bayesian approach. METHODS: The inverse problem of electrocardiography was solved by reconstructing epicardial potentials from 120 body-surface electrocardiograms and from patient-specific geometry of the heart and torso for four patients suffering from scar-related ventricular tachycardia who underwent epicardial catheter mapping, which included pace-mapping. Simulations using dipole sources in patient-specific geometry were also performed. The proposed method, using dynamic spatio-temporal a priori constraints of the solution, was compared with classical Tikhonov methods based on fixed constraints. RESULTS: The mean localization error of the proposed method for all available pacing sites (n=78) was significantly smaller than that achieved by Tikhonov methods; specifically, the localization accuracy for pacing in the normal tissue (n=17) was [Formula: see text] mm (mean ± SD) versus [Formula: see text] mm reported in the previous study using the same clinical data and Tikhonov regularization. Simulation experiments further supported these clinical findings. CONCLUSION: The promising results of in vivo and in silico experiments presented in this study provide a strong incentive to pursuing further investigation of data-driven Bayesian methods in solving the electrocardiographic inverse problem. SIGNIFICANCE: The proposed approach to localizing origin of ventricular activation sequence may have important applications in pre-procedure assessment of arrhythmias and in guiding their ablation treatment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".